In MN-01 Davis opposes mandates but what about subsidies ?

Dr. Brian Davis, the MN-GOP endorsed candidate for Minnesota’s First District, is in stark contrast to other Republicans and even the District’s previous Republican Congressman.

During the MN-GOP State Convention, Dr. Davis was interviewed by Gary Eichten on MPR , who asked what distinguished him from other candidates, the answer was mandates … specifically, he cited Republican State Senator Dick Day belief in alternate fuel mandates.
Without citing specifics, the presumption is that Davis disagrees with Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty who signed renewable energy legislation which was passed by the Minnesota Senate 61-4 vote and Minnesota House by 123-10.
Davis’ opposition to alternate fuel mandates must be quite a shock to former First District Congressman Gil Gutknecht whose signature issue had been his “10/10 Act” – HR 4537 - that would require all gasoline sold for use in motor vehicles to contain 10 percent renewable fuel in the year 2010. When Tim Walz was elected over the incumbent Gutknecht, John Kline immediately proposed HR 349 to enact the mandate.

On January 9th, Davis outlined to First District Republicans his ideas on Energy Policy stating “The free market and the laws of supply and demand work much better than our government attempting to mandate conservation and setting quotas.”
Davis contends that “There have been numerous attempts at ‘mandating’ our way to energy independence over the past 35 years with little success.”
His goal includes “Eliminating current automobile mileage standards and government-imposed production mandates.”
The history of CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) is pretty short. The first mandate was part of the “Energy Policy Conservation Act,” enacted into law by Congress in 1975 which was passed in response to the 1973-74 Arab oil embargo. The next major change will be affected by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 after President Bush requested the first increase in CAFE standards in January. The legislation was overwhelmingly approved by Congress including including Minnesota’s Norm Coleman and 36 other Republican Senators. It will require in part that automakers boost fleetwide gas mileage to 35 mpg by the year 2020.
Davis contention that were “little success” are disputed by a committee of the National Academy of Sciences who wrote a 2002 report on the effects of the CAFE standard. The report’s conclusions include a finding that in the absence of CAFE, and with no other fuel economy regulation substituted, motor vehicle fuel consumption would have been approximately 14 percent higher than it actually was in 2002.

Opposing mandates seems to be a prime mission for Davis who said at the First Congressional District Republican endorsing convention on March 29th, “We need to focus less on mandates that pay tribute to the falsehoods of man-made global warming and emphasize more the free market, and increasing domestic energy supply.”
What Davis does want, he states: “If Congress wants an energy bill it should work to remove obstacles to domestic energy production by increasing supply, such as opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the Outer Continental Shelf for oil exploration and recovery.”
Although drilling in ANWR is a popular idea among some Republicans, it is opposed by presumed Republican Presidential nominee John McCain and MN Senator Norm Coleman. Additionally, Florida Republican Governors Jeb Bush and Charlie Crist have opposed drilling in OCS.
Here’s my question for Dr. Davis, if drilling is permitted in ANWR and the OCS, who should receive the royalties and how much should be paid? For example, the Alaska Permanent Fund paid dividends in the amount of $1654 to every eligible man, woman and child in 2007. Increasing ANWR drilling will increase this “subsidy” and yet, why should Minnesotan taxpayers help to pay for a “Bridge to Nowhere” while Alaska has no state income tax and is 50th in rankings of state sales tax (yep, that’s the lowest in the nation.) Second, current leases for drilling in the Gulf Coast didn’t include price thresholds that require companies to pay royalties. With the rampant run-up in market price of a barrel of oil, why shouldn’t a royalty be paid as it is in Alaska? And, obviously, why doesn’t that royalty payment belong in the general US Treasury?

Davis states his other energy solution as “It’s clear today that nuclear energy can play a key role in expanding electric power generation and reducing our dependence on foreign oil and natural gas, a major fuel source for electricity generation.”
Here’s my question for Dr. Davis, if you oppose mandates, will you oppose subsidies for the nuclear industry ? Taxpayer subsidies include over $13 billion in the Energy Policy Act of 2005. While the Omnibus Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2008 includes more than $18 billion in federal loan guarantees.

As a fiscal conservative, I have a greater tolerance for mandates that improve fuel in inefficiencies which reduce consumption, and I oppose subsidies that benefit selected groups.

Davis appears to be locking onto a energy ideology that is out of step with our needs and even out of step with prominent Republicans (Bush, McCain, Coleman, Pawlenty, etc.)

As voters consider who to support in the Republican primary, Dick Day asks "Where should our tax dollars be targeted?" while Dr. Davis appears to tell us what we want.

To beat John Kline in MN-02, DFL needs to use GOP strategy

Plato once said, “The penalty that people pay for not being interested in politics is to be governed by people worse than themselves.”

The Greeks gave us the word – apatheia – or as it is known in English - APATHY.
By derivation, that would be “a” for “not” and “pathos” for suffering.
By definition: Indifference to ones interests; lacking in passion or excitement.

So, the question must be asked: Whose fault is this? It is yours and mine – the people of this state and nation. People are tired of this condition of government and like thousands of Americans in every place, they want change. Now is the time … NOW is the time. It is your job and, believe me, it will be a hard job. We have good Democrats – men and women – all over this state who will service you in the halls of government. But mere, wishing for that will not make it so. You must work at precinct levels like you have never worked before. There are door bells to be pushed and people to be talked to. The Republicans have not stayed in power through the excellence of their candidates, but through the excellence of their organization. Quit being ashamed of being a Democrat. Quit hiding behind the cloak of fear. This is your job and my job -- the victory will be yours and yours alone and with this victory will go the assurances of honor in politics and the start of a return all over this country to the American way of life. NOW IS THE TIME.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

After reading the above passage, are you inspired ?

Those words have been modified (essentially replacing Republican with Democrat) from Barry Goldwater who used this approach in November 1950 to start the Republican takeover of Arizona’s politics.

1950 or 2008, the message is the same, voters are tired of the existing situation but motivating them … turning Apathy into Engagement is the key.

By all accounts, Steve Sarvi is way behind in the always important money race. The national Democratic Party has a lot of Republican seats that they would like to challenge --- labeling some as “Red to Blue” seats. MN-02 is not one of them.

That is a shame if you believe that John Kline is not representing the District on your issues. Kline is rated in the top 20 of Conservatives and many times votes in the minority of the Republican Party.
How can anyone represent such a diverse District and yet not even vote with a majority of Republicans ... such as on HR 3221 Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008 which 95 Republicans and 227 Democrats supported;
HR 4137 Extend the Higher Education Act of 1965 which 135 Republicans and 219 Democrats supported;
HR 1429 Improving Head Start Act which 142 Republicans and 223 Democrats supported;
HR 2272 21st Century Competitiveness Act which 143 Republicans and 224 Democrats supported;
HR 802 Maritime Pollution Prevention Act which 143 Republicans and 216 Democrats supported;
and there are pleny more.

He even votes against Sense of the House Resolutions such as HR Res. 112 Supporting the Goals and Ideas of a National Child Care Worthy Wage Day which 122 Republicans and 223 Democrats supported.

Besides these votes, much has been written about his votes on SCHIP, GI Educational Funding, Energy, etc.

Plain, and simple, John Kline is an ideologist.
Ideologists do not advance legislation (or society), just their own vision – and voting against any change that does not advance their ideology even if it serves the general public.

Kline is so far out of favor that his influence rating by Congress.Org is #396 down from #253 in 2006.

The appeal of familiarity has kept the incumbent Kline in office, but now a Goodwin Simon Victoria Research poll (taken 5/19-22 of likely voters) in Minnesota's 2nd District suggests that Sarvi has a chance.
From the polling report : “It has become very clear in this election cycle that many Congressional seats formerly considered "Republican" seats are now in play; very little is safe for the GOP at present. Our recent poll results indicate that Minnesota's 2nd Congressional District has officially reached the tipping point, as the generic ballot between any "Democrat" and a "Republican" for Congress starts out as tied, 40% to 40%, for the first time in this district's history. Add to this Sarvi's compelling personal narrative and moderate inclinations, and Democrats have a real chance to take this district in November.”
According to the poll, once voters are read a single positive statement about Sarvi, they back his candidacy 49 percent to 37 percent over Kline.

Although money (click to contribute) is always important, getting the Steve Sarvi story out is essential … and that is what will convert the apathetic voter to the engaged voter.

Heck, if it worked for Goldwater in Arizona, why can’t it work in MN-02?

How long have Republicans opposed funding PTSD ?

With the questions of Barak Obama’s patriotism and his stated support of the troops, I decided to do a little Googling. To eliminate potential pandering (or political posturing that occurs many times before an election,) I focused on 2005.
My question was: What legislation did Obama sponsor related to Veterans Issues ?

On September 17, 2005 Obama spoke in support of his amendment SA 2616 : To accelerate marriage penalty relief for the earned income tax credit, to extend the election to include combat pay in earned income, and to make modifications of effective dates of leasing provisions of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004.

The amendment, argued Obama on the Senate floor, would "... ensure that the families of our men and women in combat are not deprived of their tax benefits. In the midst of war, are we really going to tell our troops that their combat pay doesn't count as earned income for purposes of calculating tax credits? That is hard to imagine. Our troops not only earn their combat pay, but they have also earned our respect. They deserve our commitment of support."

The amendment failed.
Remember that in 2005, the Republicans were in the majority party and even though SA 2616 had the support of every Democrat, the Republicans killed it.

That got me looking at other amendments offered to the bill, and this is what really galls me.

Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) proposed SA 2634 : “for readjustment counseling, related mental health services, and treatment and rehabilitative services for veterans with mental illness, post-traumatic stress disorder, or substance use disorder.”

Boxer cited that "This amendment is backed by the American Legion, AMVETS, and Disabled American Veterans." She closed her floor argument by quoting an e-mail from the wife of an Iraq War Veteran who committed suicide upon his return. "I got an e-mail from a woman who was married to Captain Michael Jon Pelkey, who suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder for over a year. He sought help on several occasions but was discouraged by the wait time and the stigma, " said Boxer.
Boxer then read directly from the e-mail which said "Michael passed away in our home at Ft. Sill, Oklahoma from a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the chest on November 5, 2004. I feel that my husband is a casualty of this war and to date the Army has not done enough for post-traumatic stress. "

That funding also FAILED.
Once again, every Democrat voted for the funding but only one Republican voted for it – Gordon Smith who’s own son suicide lead to the funding of $82 million for youth suicide prevention programs at college campus mental health centers.
Yes, that means that John McCain (and Norm Coleman) voted against funding PTSD.

That was 2005.

What could that funding have accomplished ?
How many lives affected ?
IF the problem was evident in 2005, is it a bigger or smaller problem today ?

The RAND Corporation issued a report on April 16th titled Invisible Wounds of War which stated that 300,000 (or 18.5%) of the troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan may have PTSD. "These consequences can have a high economic toll," RAND said. "However, most attempts to measure the costs of these conditions focus only on medical costs to the government. Yet, direct costs of treatment are only a fraction of the total costs related to mental health and cognitive conditions. Far higher are the long-term individual and societal costs stemming from lost productivity, reduced quality of life, homelessness, domestic violence, the strain on families, and suicide. Delivering effective care and restoring veterans to full mental health have the potential to reduce these longer-term costs significantly."

In addition, the Veterans Administration reported in April that 60,000 discharged vets have been diagnosed with mental health problems.

One of the common complaints that have been directed at the Bush Administration is that they only planned for the invasion of Iraq and not for the occupation and resulting consequences (old weaponry, inadequate body armor and helmets, minimally protected vehicles, etc.)
But considering PTSD, the Senate --- led by the blocking wedge of Republicans – has failed in funding.

The Senate could still do something.
Those of us in Minnesota’s First District are well aware (and appreciate) Congressman Tim Walz’s efforts on Veterans issues. But he cannot do it alone … he needs Senate support. For example, Walz was an original co-sponsor of H.R. 2874 Veterans' Health Care Improvement Act of 2007. Although the House passed Walz’s bill last August, the Senate has failed to act on it.
That doesn’t mean that the Republicans in the Senate won’t acknowledge the problem. For example, Senators Richard Burr (NC) and Larry Craig (ID) have proposed S. 2573 Veterans Mental Health Treatment First Act. The bill does more to LIMIT veterans’ benefits and requires extensive requirements for participation. Little wonder that there are only two Senators willing to put their name on the legislation.
Besides the PTSD issue, TBI (Traumatic Brain Injury) is another issue that is a major concern. Once again, Congressman Tim Walz (joined by Keith Ellison D-MN-05 and Jim Oberstar D-MN-08) co-sponsored HR 2199 : Traumatic Brain Injury Health Enhancement and Long-Term Support Act of 2007. Once again, the House passed this legislation in May 2007, but the Senate has failed to act.

Voters will decide in November whether McCain’s patriotism is more relevant that Obama’s support for Veterans issues.

While these two Senators take time to campaign, why cannot Norm Coleman get his Republican colleagues to address these issues.

Remember, VOTE 60.

Walz graduates from NBL to Statesman

Today’s Congress seems to be composed of mostly of ideologists and party loyalists with a few Natural Born Leaders (NBL) and definitely a shortage of Statesmen.
On particular issues, some members of Congress break party instructions and vote based on District or State needs, but too often, the Roll Call votes are dictated by party managers. Vision is based on the next election … not what is best for the nation’s long-term future.

Statesmen are those that think outside of party ideology. They generally don’t become Statesmen until the end of their political career or as a result of some political loss. For example, after losing to George Bush the Republican Presidential endorsement, Senator John McCain became a Statesman – enacting Campaign Finance Reform , brokering the Gang of 14 resolution to the Judicial Appointment dispute, and offering Immigration legislation – but now Candidate McCain has reverted to embrace the Bush economic ideology and other ideology favored by his Party. This week, the Senate is debating a Cap-and-Trade bill that is authored by retiring Republican John Warner and Independent Joe Lieberman. Consider them to be examples of Statesmen. In Minnesota, I would call Republican Jim Ramstad a Statesman … check out his votes and note how many times he bucks the party managers and votes in the Country’s best interest. Conversely, look at Republican John Kline’s voting record and he not only votes with the party most of the time, his Conservative ideology has him voting against the Party majority on many issues.
Jim Ramstad will be missed in the next Congress, but Minnesotans should be glad that Congressman Tim Walz is demonstrating Statesman vision.

On Monday, June 2nd, Congressman Walz arranged an economic summit consisting of five panels related to consumer issues, health care, education, workforce requirements, etc. Bluestem Prairie performed yeoman’s service by live-blogging the events of the day. It’s a great read, as you can virtually see the presentation of ideas and the exchanges from some of the audience. Walz described the conference as an idea-generator- “gathering from the people and forming that into legislation or initiatives back in D.C." with the intended results to make "a huge difference on the impact felt by the average person."

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) recently said “There’s no end to the drive of members to get good, cheap publicity,” so one might question the motives when a member of Congress schedules a public event just months before re-election. But Walz, has had numerous similar events – the first economic summit was last July in Austin. Getting citizen involvement is not unusual for Walz who has at least six summits on Veterans issues this year.

When Walz started his Congressional term, I labeled him a NBL and a few summits does not earn some Statesman status, but what he said as Keynote Speaker does.
Once again, read Bluestem Prairie’s summation.

Walz has moved beyond party politics and into public policy.
He talks of his own real world experiences and those offered by the presenters and audience.
He sees what needs to be done … not for Tim Walz, nor for Tim Walz’s re-election, but for the nation … that’s Statesmanship !

As voters consider who to cast their votes for, ask “Am I voting for a Statesman or an Ideologist ?”
I will vote for a Statesman every time --- regardless of political party --- but never an Ideologist.

Poll suggests new challenge for Walz in MN-01

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee engaged the Benenson Strategy Group to poll Minnesota’s First District and the surprising results reveal a new challenge for Congressman Tim Walz.
It’s a return of an old nemesis of the DFL – Apathy !

The poll results indicate Walz getting 57% of the vote with 21 % undecided. While an incumbent getting over 50 % is expected, it is overzealous to think that a Democrat could convert that many voters in a historically strong Republican district to support him. Republican Gil Gutknecht comfortably won the district repeatedly and his staff and polling did not anticipate a change for the 2006 election. In fact, a Majority Watch poll just days before the November election, indicated that Gutknecht held 50% of the vote to 47% for Walz. The final results were Walz in a 52% to 48% victory. My analysis is that Walz won by beating Gutknecht in Olmstead County … Gutknecht’s home turf. The primary issue to Rochester voters was Gutknecht’s support for the DM&E railroad. That issue will not dominate this year’s election. To think that Walz will not have a strong challenge promotes complacency.

While Walz has done a great job engaging voters through a variety of summits (on veteran’s issues, health care, economy, etc.) and is deserving of re-election, the battle will be to continually engage potentially apathetic voters. The Republicans have historically done an outstanding job to getting their voters to the polls, but the DFL continues lose elections by giving voters enough reasons to support the Republican candidates (Pawlenty, Coleman, Kline).

Apathy occurs when voters feel the outcome is already decided or the candidates on the ballot are not exciting. The US Senate race will certainly unite the Republicans, and with image being created for Al Franken, it may turn-off some Minnesota voters as they switch from voting based on issues (SCHIP, energy policy, tax policy, foreign relations, etc.) to personal issues.

While Walz may have adequate financial resources to counter the onslaught from the Smear and Sleaze 527 groups such as Freedom's Watch, Free and Strong America PAC, Defense of Democracies Action Fund, etc., his real challenge will be to continue to speak a message that engages voters.

My suggestion is that he needs to take his message beyond the First District.

IF you believe that Wind Energy is a critical part of the energy solution,
IF you believe that our veterans should have a 21st Century GI Bill,
IF you believe that the Invisible Wounds of War (PTSD, depression, suicide) need to be addressed,
IF you believe that there is a difference between Pork-barrel spending and justified transparent Earmarks in spending bills,
IF you believe that the punitive mandates of No Child Left Behind must be eliminated,
IF you believe that our health care system needs to serve the children of low-income families,
IF these are your issues, then supporting Tim Walz is not enough.

Although these issues are ones that Minnesotans care about, Walz is stymied in getting legislation enacted.
Why ?
The Republicans play games.
For example, the Supporting the Troops Game – while Walz voted in favor, Second District Congressman John Kline voted Present thereby ensuring that the funds required would not be authorized.
Further, Kline voted Against funding to expand veteran’s education. It extends the benefit for those serving in the National Guard who presently do not receive GI Education benefits. The GI Bill gets paid for by requiring approximately 500,000 taxpayers to have a surtax of 0.5% of couples earning more than $1,000,000 or individuals earning more than $500,000. Shockingly, Kline is a co-sponsor of the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008 which promotes the same benefits.

Games and a disservice to our country is what the Republicans are offering !

Supporting Tim Walz means electing people who share his vision. Walz may have a Republican challenger on the ballot, but to enact the necessary improvements in our government, Walz needs help in Congress. Returning John Kline to the Second District for another term will only result in more games. Steve Sarvi needs support … as does Ashwin Madia and Elwyn Tinklenberg

Walz should take the challenge of pushing his issues and defeating the Republican game-players in other districts. No doubt, Walz campaign organizers will not accept the Benenson poll and relax .. in fact, they should take it as incentive that Walz’s message is the right message and work to help elect more Democrats.

Voter Apathy is Walz's biggest challenge.

Who Deserves a Change in Capital Gains Tax Rate ?

One would have thought that before the National Republican Congressional Committee selected the “Change You Deserve” slogan , it would have asked If it will play in Peoria? But then, since the results of that interim election are already known, the Republicans must have figured that it was a fluke to lose Denny Hastert’s seat to a Democrat. But now after losing House seats in Louisiana and Mississippi, Marc Ambinder asserts, may be the slogan should be ”change or die.”

Bluestem Prairie has provided (as usual) excellent documentation of the co-opting of “Change You Deserve” slogan, but co-opting is not unusual in politics. Heck, the Democrats were proposing a program entitled Leave No Child Behind, that Bush co-opted to No Child Left Behind … so be warned that slogans are just marketing tools.

What we voters need to be concerned about is what the “Change You Deserve” program might include. Personally, I don’t like the slogan … it hits me as a declaratory sentence … this what You Deserve … not what you Want … or Need ... or what is Best for the country. Heck, I would like to see a change in our foreign policy, health care reform, environmental awareness, etc. but from what the Republicans are proposing, I won’t get what I want in a Republican agenda … but just what I Deserve.

So, what are they offering ?

How about HR 5908 which provide a permanent zero percent capital gains rate for individuals and corporations.

Great no taxes for passive investors … shift the focus to paying taxes on working wages.

But let’s examine what that could mean … after all, calculating the capital gains for my 2007 income tax return resulted in a $400 savings. Now, $400 may be a week’s take home pay for some … or a weekend getaway for others.

So, all investors would get some. And that seems to be the Republican philosophy … its share the wealth … as long everybody gets some, everybody wins … even if some may get more than others.

For example, not to pick on any individual, but let’s just look at someone who is in the spotlight considering the proposal for a gas tax holiday. Rex Tillerson is Chairman of the Board of Exxon-Mobil and has one outstanding equity award for 197,307 at a price of $37.12 ( oh, don’t worry, there are more awards he has... that just one .. plus he already owns 929,149 shares). With today’s market value in the $90 range, that would be a tidy capital gain of $52.78 per share …. or $10,432,607.
OK, so $400 for me and $10 million for you.

Some may say that this is an isolated example, but we should have a concern about what motivates legislative proposals. For example, one of the co-sponsors of HR 5908 is James Sensenbrenner (R-IL) who’s net worth is estimated to be at least $21 million and is a stockholder in Exxon-Mobil.

Somehow, I think some think they Deserve more than others.
Now, I am depressed ... I think I need a Venlafaxine.

Who do you want in your foxhole – A Republican or A Democrat ?

From Stars & Stripes is this most appropriate headline : Democrats press VA on suicide rate.

At a hearing entitled “The Truth About Veteran Suicides”, the ranking Republican, Steve Buyer stood alone.
While Democrat committee members Bob Filner (Chairman), Corrine Brown, Vic Snyder, Michael Michaud, Harry Mitchell, John Hall, Phil Hare, John Salazar, Ciro Rodriguez, Jerry McNerney, and Minnesota's First District Congressman Tim Walz all participated in active discussion of the mental health care for our veterans, the Republicans had one member show up ! Heck, even Democrat Congressman Patrick Kennedy, who sponsored HR 1424 Mental Health Parity , attended even though he is not on the Veterans Affairs Committee.
Where were Republicans Cliff Sterns(FL), Jerry Moran(KS), Jeff Miller(FL), Henry Brown(SC), John Boozman(AR), Ginny Brown-Waite(FL), Michael Turner(OH), Brian Bilbray(CA), Doug Lamborn (CO), Gus Bilirakis (FL), and Vern Buchanan (FL) ?
They were AWOL from the committee hearing but did participate in roll call votes later that day. (Note : I have listed the states to signify that none were from North Carolina or Indiana that had primaries that day.)

Listening to Dr. James Peake’s (Secretary of the Veterans Administration) remarks, it was akin to hearing meteorologists discuss whether Hurricane Katrina was a #4 or #5 when it hit the coast without mentioning the human lives that were lost.
Peake offered all sorts of statistical analysis in an attempt to refute the concerns that suicides were now of epidemic proportions. Personally, I marveled at how the Secretary was trying to placate the Congressmen by boring them with statistical drivel.
Then when Committee chairman Bob Filner spoke, I knew Peake’s efforts were in vain. Filner said :“This is not a bureaucratic situation with numbers. This is life or death. I think there is clear evidence of a cover-up, and I think there is criminal negligence here.”

That’s what seemed so inappropriate.
While the Democrats were talking about intervention and outreach programs, increased access points, and veterans “losing faith in the system”, the VA seemed to be concerned with perception and numbers.
Researchers found about 1,000 suicide attempts among veterans each month, including an overall suicide rate among males using VA facilities of 37.2 per 100,000 patients. Worse yet, in the critical age group of young men 18 to 29, the rate was 53.18 versus 20.36 per the National Death Index.
These numbers are significantly different than what was presented at the December 12, 2007 hearing.
After the December hearing and reviewing the situation, VA Mental Health Director Ira Katz wrote an email with the subject line stating “Shh!” and asks “Is this something we should carefully address ourselves in some sort of release before someone stumbles on it?”
The awkward subject line of the email “Shh!” may have gotten the media’s attention, but Filner asked Katz the key question -- "Did you tell Dr. Peake of your concerns" – and Katz’s non-answer confirmed that he did not have any conversations with the Secretary.
All that was missing in this hearing was for President Bush to interject "Katzie, you're doing a heckuva job."
Why Dr. Katz is still employed is amazing !

Obviously to answer the question, I would want a Democrat in my foxhole … but specifically, Tim Walz.
When Congressman Walz had his opportunity to ask questions, he was passionate, concerned, irritated yet also able to extend “tough love” for the Secretary. Walz praised Minnesota’s Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty and Minnesota’s National Guard organization for implementing the Beyond the Yellow Ribbon program. Countering Peake’s use of statistics, Walz pointed out that the Beyond the Yellow Ribbon campaign involves 99% of the returning National Guard while the regular military is at 36%. Walz was frustrated that there was no planning for how to handle the returning servicemen (and servicewomen) before the Iraq War started. Walz was angry that the VA was so slow in providing information that he requested (getting only one hour before the hearing).
[SIDEBAR : At least Walz got his information, Congressman Mitchell (D-AZ) was told to file a Freedom of Information Act to get his data. Mitchell is concerned as Arizona has seen a 39% increase in suicides …. Why isn’t Arizona Senator John McCain expressing the same concern?]
Walz expressed concerns that the VA has not involved county service personnel and other groups to assist these returning vets. Republican Congressman Buyer interrupted Walz to praise Walz for his questions. I sense that Congressman Buyer would want Walz in his foxhole -- afterall who would want to be there alone.

The essential question that the Veterans Affairs Committee was asking is “How can we help?”
Is the VA under-funded, under-staffed, or under-utilized … and Secretary Peake and Dr. Katz never once responded.

The care for our military is not only affecting our veterans but also the active duty personnel returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. The condition of Army barracks made national headlines in recent weeks after the father of Sgt. Jeff Frawley, a soldier in the 82nd Airborne Division, posted a video of his son's barracks at Fort Bragg, N.C., on the Internet. The Army immediately reacted when it announced Wednesday it would spend $248 million this year on eight bases in the USA that have serious problems with mold, plumbing and temperature control.

This revelation was made after the Washington Post reported in 2007 of mice droppings, mold and unlivable conditions in Walter Reed Army Medical Center’s Building 18, a facility where outpatients stay.

Why isn’t the Bush Administration addressing these problems before they are brought to public light ?

This week, the House will probably vote on the FY 2008 war funding supplemental bill. One of the key amendments is an improved GI education benefit program for veterans.
No doubt the Republicans will show up to vote on that amendment as Republican Study Group's Brad Watson blogged that the Administration is opposed to because it may weaken the current, all-volunteer force.
That’s right providing incentives for people to join the military might weaken the current military !

No doubt during the debate, the Republicans will chant “We need to give the troops the TOOLS they need” … and that should be answered by the Democrats with “We need to give the troops the CARE that they need.”